Bullet-Point Update: Electronic and Federal Court Discovery Issues for the Week of July 31, 2017

Use this when the other side tries to dig up dirt on your expert. Collett v. GEICO Cas. Co., 2017 WL 3336614 (E.D. La. Aug. 3, 2017) (denying motion to compel expert witness to testify about fraud allegations that had been made against him seven years earlier)

Use this when the other side sends you an unprepared deponent. Evanston Ins. Co. v. Dimeda Instrumente GMBH, 2017 WL 3394112 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 7, 2017) (requiring new corporate representative deposition where witness was not adequately prepared, but declining to require specific person most knowledgeable to be designated as the witness)

Spoliation

Use this to defend negligent or good faith routine business practice destruction of evidence. Hefter Impact Technologies, LLC v. Sport Maska, Inc., 2017 WL 3317413 (D. Macc. Aug. 3, 2017) (declining to award sanctions other than fees for the motion, despite deletion of old emails, wiping of a hard drive and negligent trashing of notebooks)

Use this when the other side allows key evidence to disappear. EEOC v. JBS USA, LLC, 2017 WL 3334648 (D. Col. Aug. 4, 2017) (precluding defendant's evidence that prayer breaks caused production delays as a sanction for failure to preserve records of delays)

Use this to force the other side to do some investigation. Turk v. Somerville County Hospital Dist., 2017 WL 3392786 (W.D. Tex. Aug. 7, 2017) (boilerplate burdensomeness objection overruled where defendant had to interview 20 employees to find out whether any of them referred to a co-worker as "camel toe")

Use this to defend yourself when your objections had to be a bit repetitive. Quinonez-Castellanos v. Performance Contractors, Inc., 2017 WL 3430511 (N.D. Iowa Aug. 9, 2017) (declining to compel better discovery responses where they were tailored and specific objections that were repetitive only because the requests themselves were repetitive)

Discovery Costs

Use this to whittle away at the other side’s fee award. Johnson v. Swanson, 2017 WL 3438735 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 9, 2017) (allowing only .5, rather than 3.1 hours of recoverable fees for drafting boilerplate discovery)

Disclaimer

The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.